i know it is a mute point now that the cubs inked scott hairston, but would the cubs have been forced to give the braves a draft pick if they signed michael bourn? i just read that any team in the top 10 of the draft does not have to give up a draft pick (cubs are #2). just would like some clarification?
i like bourn and think he would have been a much better signing for 3 years, then hairston (another soriano type player) for 2 years.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
There are 22 Comments. Load Now.
Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.
C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read
R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next
Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read
Comment Settings
Live comment alert: Hide it!
Comments for this post are closed.